Post by ansaarulislaam on Mar 27, 2005 15:41:33 GMT -5
Bismillah al-Rahman al-Raheem
Political Comment
The assassination of al-Hariri served as the spark after which the Lebanese opposition carried out a host of escalatory measures, which led to igniting the political scene in Lebanon and to the resignation of the Karami government yesterday; the region is expected to witness some serious developments aimed at shaping its future anew, and these will not be confined to Syria and Lebanon.
Rafiq al-Hariri’s inclination towards the opposition sponsored by France, which America has outmanoeuvred through Walid Jumblatt, was not the only reason behind his killing. America wanted also to ignite the fuse of events in the region, where the plans of its reshaping had already entered the execution stage, because the assassination of a man of al-Hariri’s calibre in such regional circumstances is enough to trigger a chain of events that affect the region and not just Lebanon, and this is corroborated by the developments that followed the event.
The events currently experienced by Lebanon and the region are neither local nor regional, but rather international. They demonstrate the existence of a host of plans and programmes aimed at fabricating events and generating new realities on the ground, resulting in widespread changes in the region.
It is imperative to remember that America has a project she refers to as “The Greater Middle East Initiative”. She has worked towards dragging Europe through NATO to partake in its implementation. Her aim behind all of this is to complete her plans in aborting any future move by the Muslims to confront the American led Western civilisation. America fears for her unilateral dominion from the threat posed by the Muslims’ surge towards revival on the basis of Islam, which will undermine her interests in the most vital region of the world.
In proceeding with her plans, America has succeeded in devising the international convention related to fighting “terrorism”, which is geared in the first instance towards fighting Islam, especially its relationship vis-à-vis the state and society. She has succeeded in establishing a justification for her interference in any part of the Muslims’ lands under the pretence of fighting terrorism, and to even lay the foundations for what she called the pre-emptive strike, which will enable her to intervene without warning or justification. She has succeeded in executing most of what she had planned for, thus enabling her to move towards the following phase of her plans, which the current Bush administration is ostensibly determined to proceed towards implementing, especially now that she has determined their aims, namely to spread democracy, fight terrorism and settle the Middle East issue. All these aims pour into one single domain, namely the domain related to Islam, the Muslims and their lands.
It seems that America’s progress towards implementing her plans for the region in the current phase requires occasioning a host of changes that will affect Greater Syria and Egypt. Working towards settling the Middle East issue will be the utmost priority; this is indicated clearly by the acceleration of events recently. During his recent visit to France, king Abdullah called for the extending of the scope of negotiations to include Lebanon and Syria, who had declared in the wake of the visit two months ago by Terry Rod Larsen, the United Nations Middle East envoy, that she was prepared to enter into negotiations with “Israel” without any preconditions; Bashar Assad was even quoted by the Italian newspaper La Repubblica in its yesterday’s edition as saying: “We can withdraw our forces before the end of the year. Strategically, this can only happen if we get some serious guarantees, i.e. peace.” Despite Syria’s craving for linking the Lebanese and Syrian tracks together in the peace talks, the Israeli pullout from south Lebanon and the United Nations’ recent verdict that the Shebaa Farms were Syrian and not Lebanese, coupled with “Israel’s” persistence not to engage in talks on both tracks simultaneously, has left Syria with no options save for maintaining her presence in the Bekaa valley as stipulated by al-Taif agreement, according to her own interpretation, and it seems that Bashar’s recent statements regarding the peace process and his exploitation of the current pressures on Syria, coupled possibly with deliberate “Israeli” provocations and an appropriate prelude to be offered by the forthcoming Arab League summit in Algiers, all this could open the door of the peace talks on the Syrian track. As for the Lebanese track, the potential military frictions between Hezbollah and “Israel” once the pretext of “Israel” to remain on the lands of the south is nullified will enable the Lebanese regime to proceed in the peace process. Once the Lebanese regime enters into talks with “Israel” under the auspices of the United Nations, this will serve as ample pretext to disarm Hezbollah and for the withdrawal of the Syrian forces from the Bekaa for good, according to the al-Taif agreement and resolution 1559, which stipulates the disarming of the militias in Lebanon. Hence, the recent statement of Walid Jumblatt will be clearly perceived; he rejected the disarmament of Hezbollah, which indicates that he was luring Hezbollah towards joining the opposition.
As for the most prominent milestones of the current phase in respect of America’s execution of her plans in the region, it seems that they will be labelled by what appeared on the al-Jazeera channel, namely “the popular change”; this means enabling the masses to seize the initiative, which will spare America the burden of direct military intervention and the deployment of troops, especially in the cities. It is the lesson that America does not wish to repeat, especially after the bitter experience that she has endured and is still enduring in Iraq.
Political Comment
The assassination of al-Hariri served as the spark after which the Lebanese opposition carried out a host of escalatory measures, which led to igniting the political scene in Lebanon and to the resignation of the Karami government yesterday; the region is expected to witness some serious developments aimed at shaping its future anew, and these will not be confined to Syria and Lebanon.
Rafiq al-Hariri’s inclination towards the opposition sponsored by France, which America has outmanoeuvred through Walid Jumblatt, was not the only reason behind his killing. America wanted also to ignite the fuse of events in the region, where the plans of its reshaping had already entered the execution stage, because the assassination of a man of al-Hariri’s calibre in such regional circumstances is enough to trigger a chain of events that affect the region and not just Lebanon, and this is corroborated by the developments that followed the event.
The events currently experienced by Lebanon and the region are neither local nor regional, but rather international. They demonstrate the existence of a host of plans and programmes aimed at fabricating events and generating new realities on the ground, resulting in widespread changes in the region.
It is imperative to remember that America has a project she refers to as “The Greater Middle East Initiative”. She has worked towards dragging Europe through NATO to partake in its implementation. Her aim behind all of this is to complete her plans in aborting any future move by the Muslims to confront the American led Western civilisation. America fears for her unilateral dominion from the threat posed by the Muslims’ surge towards revival on the basis of Islam, which will undermine her interests in the most vital region of the world.
In proceeding with her plans, America has succeeded in devising the international convention related to fighting “terrorism”, which is geared in the first instance towards fighting Islam, especially its relationship vis-à-vis the state and society. She has succeeded in establishing a justification for her interference in any part of the Muslims’ lands under the pretence of fighting terrorism, and to even lay the foundations for what she called the pre-emptive strike, which will enable her to intervene without warning or justification. She has succeeded in executing most of what she had planned for, thus enabling her to move towards the following phase of her plans, which the current Bush administration is ostensibly determined to proceed towards implementing, especially now that she has determined their aims, namely to spread democracy, fight terrorism and settle the Middle East issue. All these aims pour into one single domain, namely the domain related to Islam, the Muslims and their lands.
It seems that America’s progress towards implementing her plans for the region in the current phase requires occasioning a host of changes that will affect Greater Syria and Egypt. Working towards settling the Middle East issue will be the utmost priority; this is indicated clearly by the acceleration of events recently. During his recent visit to France, king Abdullah called for the extending of the scope of negotiations to include Lebanon and Syria, who had declared in the wake of the visit two months ago by Terry Rod Larsen, the United Nations Middle East envoy, that she was prepared to enter into negotiations with “Israel” without any preconditions; Bashar Assad was even quoted by the Italian newspaper La Repubblica in its yesterday’s edition as saying: “We can withdraw our forces before the end of the year. Strategically, this can only happen if we get some serious guarantees, i.e. peace.” Despite Syria’s craving for linking the Lebanese and Syrian tracks together in the peace talks, the Israeli pullout from south Lebanon and the United Nations’ recent verdict that the Shebaa Farms were Syrian and not Lebanese, coupled with “Israel’s” persistence not to engage in talks on both tracks simultaneously, has left Syria with no options save for maintaining her presence in the Bekaa valley as stipulated by al-Taif agreement, according to her own interpretation, and it seems that Bashar’s recent statements regarding the peace process and his exploitation of the current pressures on Syria, coupled possibly with deliberate “Israeli” provocations and an appropriate prelude to be offered by the forthcoming Arab League summit in Algiers, all this could open the door of the peace talks on the Syrian track. As for the Lebanese track, the potential military frictions between Hezbollah and “Israel” once the pretext of “Israel” to remain on the lands of the south is nullified will enable the Lebanese regime to proceed in the peace process. Once the Lebanese regime enters into talks with “Israel” under the auspices of the United Nations, this will serve as ample pretext to disarm Hezbollah and for the withdrawal of the Syrian forces from the Bekaa for good, according to the al-Taif agreement and resolution 1559, which stipulates the disarming of the militias in Lebanon. Hence, the recent statement of Walid Jumblatt will be clearly perceived; he rejected the disarmament of Hezbollah, which indicates that he was luring Hezbollah towards joining the opposition.
As for the most prominent milestones of the current phase in respect of America’s execution of her plans in the region, it seems that they will be labelled by what appeared on the al-Jazeera channel, namely “the popular change”; this means enabling the masses to seize the initiative, which will spare America the burden of direct military intervention and the deployment of troops, especially in the cities. It is the lesson that America does not wish to repeat, especially after the bitter experience that she has endured and is still enduring in Iraq.